Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think it's really funny to compare this thread with the hysterical "sharia law" threads.
Isn't that what you just did?
Yes, that is exactly what I did. Because it's funny.
But is isn't an argument. Come on man. If you want comedy go watch the last episodes of Jon Stewart or something. I thought I'd get one serious response from you....
It IS an argument.
It's completely relevant to what we're talking about - that in this country, the law trumps religious beliefs.
Isn't that what you just did?
Yes, that is exactly what I did. Because it's funny.
But is isn't an argument. Come on man. If you want comedy go watch the last episodes of Jon Stewart or something. I thought I'd get one serious response from you....
It IS an argument.
It's completely relevant to what we're talking about - that in this country, the law trumps religious beliefs.
So acting the clown is an argument now. Okay then. So why is there a law or laws protecting religious beliefs then? The RFRA for one, the First Amendment for two.
Let me try to explain this as simply as possible.
Religious beliefs and practices are protected, as long as they don't violate the law.
The law comes first.
I think it's really funny to compare this thread with the hysterical "sharia law" threads.
Isn't that what you just did?
Yes, that is exactly what I did. Because it's funny.
But is isn't an argument. Come on man. If you want comedy go watch the last episodes of Jon Stewart or something. I thought I'd get one serious response from you....
It IS an argument.
It's completely relevant to what we're talking about - that in this country, the law trumps religious beliefs.Yes, that is exactly what I did. Because it's funny.
But is isn't an argument. Come on man. If you want comedy go watch the last episodes of Jon Stewart or something. I thought I'd get one serious response from you....
It IS an argument.
It's completely relevant to what we're talking about - that in this country, the law trumps religious beliefs.
So acting the clown is an argument now. Okay then. So why is there a law or laws protecting religious beliefs then? The RFRA for one, the First Amendment for two.
Let me try to explain this as simply as possible.
Religious beliefs and practices are protected, as long as they don't violate the law.
The law comes first.
But we are not allowed to put laws in place that violate freedom of religion.
So a law that punishes Christians for refusing to bake cakes for your butt buddies is a Bad Law. Unconstitutional. Shouldn't exist.
Isn't that what you just did?
Yes, that is exactly what I did. Because it's funny.
But is isn't an argument. Come on man. If you want comedy go watch the last episodes of Jon Stewart or something. I thought I'd get one serious response from you....
It IS an argument.
It's completely relevant to what we're talking about - that in this country, the law trumps religious beliefs.
So acting the clown is an argument now. Okay then. So why is there a law or laws protecting religious beliefs then? The RFRA for one, the First Amendment for two.
Let me try to explain this as simply as possible.
Religious beliefs and practices are protected, as long as they don't violate the law.
The law comes first.
Yes, that is exactly what I did. Because it's funny.
But is isn't an argument. Come on man. If you want comedy go watch the last episodes of Jon Stewart or something. I thought I'd get one serious response from you....
It IS an argument.
It's completely relevant to what we're talking about - that in this country, the law trumps religious beliefs.
So acting the clown is an argument now. Okay then. So why is there a law or laws protecting religious beliefs then? The RFRA for one, the First Amendment for two.
Let me try to explain this as simply as possible.
Religious beliefs and practices are protected, as long as they don't violate the law.
The law comes first.
But there are laws which protect religious belief, in that sense they along with themselves as laws make religious beliefs paramount, on the same level as the law itself.
Yes, that is exactly what I did. Because it's funny.
But is isn't an argument. Come on man. If you want comedy go watch the last episodes of Jon Stewart or something. I thought I'd get one serious response from you....
It IS an argument.
It's completely relevant to what we're talking about - that in this country, the law trumps religious beliefs.
So acting the clown is an argument now. Okay then. So why is there a law or laws protecting religious beliefs then? The RFRA for one, the First Amendment for two.
Let me try to explain this as simply as possible.
Religious beliefs and practices are protected, as long as they don't violate the law.
The law comes first.
But there are laws which protect religious belief, in that sense they along with themselves as laws make religious beliefs paramount, on the same level as the law itself.
Again, they are not a church nor did they advertise themselves as a Christian bakery. They are free to limit what product they sell but not who they sell it to.But is isn't an argument. Come on man. If you want comedy go watch the last episodes of Jon Stewart or something. I thought I'd get one serious response from you....
It IS an argument.
It's completely relevant to what we're talking about - that in this country, the law trumps religious beliefs.
So acting the clown is an argument now. Okay then. So why is there a law or laws protecting religious beliefs then? The RFRA for one, the First Amendment for two.
Let me try to explain this as simply as possible.
Religious beliefs and practices are protected, as long as they don't violate the law.
The law comes first.
But there are laws which protect religious belief, in that sense they along with themselves as laws make religious beliefs paramount, on the same level as the law itself.
Exactly.
No Christian is proposing child sacrifice. This is a matter of refusing to bake cakes for a ceremony that we are bound by our religion to fail to acknowledge.
But is isn't an argument. Come on man. If you want comedy go watch the last episodes of Jon Stewart or something. I thought I'd get one serious response from you....
It IS an argument.
It's completely relevant to what we're talking about - that in this country, the law trumps religious beliefs.
So acting the clown is an argument now. Okay then. So why is there a law or laws protecting religious beliefs then? The RFRA for one, the First Amendment for two.
Let me try to explain this as simply as possible.
Religious beliefs and practices are protected, as long as they don't violate the law.
The law comes first.
But there are laws which protect religious belief, in that sense they along with themselves as laws make religious beliefs paramount, on the same level as the law itself.
No, that's simply not true.
Again, if I joined a cult that performed human sacrifices, would that be a "protected religious belief"?
Again, they are not a church nor did they advertise themselves as a Christian bakery. They are free to limit what product they sell but not who they sell it to.It IS an argument.
It's completely relevant to what we're talking about - that in this country, the law trumps religious beliefs.
So acting the clown is an argument now. Okay then. So why is there a law or laws protecting religious beliefs then? The RFRA for one, the First Amendment for two.
Let me try to explain this as simply as possible.
Religious beliefs and practices are protected, as long as they don't violate the law.
The law comes first.
But there are laws which protect religious belief, in that sense they along with themselves as laws make religious beliefs paramount, on the same level as the law itself.
Exactly.
No Christian is proposing child sacrifice. This is a matter of refusing to bake cakes for a ceremony that we are bound by our religion to fail to acknowledge.
They need to be a church to discriminate.Again, they are not a church nor did they advertise themselves as a Christian bakery. They are free to limit what product they sell but not who they sell it to.So acting the clown is an argument now. Okay then. So why is there a law or laws protecting religious beliefs then? The RFRA for one, the First Amendment for two.
Let me try to explain this as simply as possible.
Religious beliefs and practices are protected, as long as they don't violate the law.
The law comes first.
But there are laws which protect religious belief, in that sense they along with themselves as laws make religious beliefs paramount, on the same level as the law itself.
Exactly.
No Christian is proposing child sacrifice. This is a matter of refusing to bake cakes for a ceremony that we are bound by our religion to fail to acknowledge.
They don't need to be a church to have religious freedom. Hey, go read the Burwell v. Hobby Lobby case if you need some pointers.
But is isn't an argument. Come on man. If you want comedy go watch the last episodes of Jon Stewart or something. I thought I'd get one serious response from you....
It IS an argument.
It's completely relevant to what we're talking about - that in this country, the law trumps religious beliefs.
So acting the clown is an argument now. Okay then. So why is there a law or laws protecting religious beliefs then? The RFRA for one, the First Amendment for two.
Let me try to explain this as simply as possible.
Religious beliefs and practices are protected, as long as they don't violate the law.
The law comes first.
But there are laws which protect religious belief, in that sense they along with themselves as laws make religious beliefs paramount, on the same level as the law itself.
No, that's simply not true.
Again, if I joined a cult that performed human sacrifices, would that be a "protected religious belief"?
It IS an argument.
It's completely relevant to what we're talking about - that in this country, the law trumps religious beliefs.
So acting the clown is an argument now. Okay then. So why is there a law or laws protecting religious beliefs then? The RFRA for one, the First Amendment for two.
Let me try to explain this as simply as possible.
Religious beliefs and practices are protected, as long as they don't violate the law.
The law comes first.
But there are laws which protect religious belief, in that sense they along with themselves as laws make religious beliefs paramount, on the same level as the law itself.
No, that's simply not true.
Again, if I joined a cult that performed human sacrifices, would that be a "protected religious belief"?
My, my, aren't we full of loaded questions? I will add that this is pretty much a red herring. Cakes and human sacrifice are far from being relevant to one another. There are some things that are taboo, killing people as part of a belief is one of them.
But, if Indians can do peyote in part due to their religious and ritual practices, then yes. If you partake in an illegal (or even barbarous) religious activity as part of a legitimate faith based belief system, it only stands to reason that you can, if you interpret the First Amendment in its strictest form. Please keep in mind that I don't advocate ritual human sacrifice.
Again, they are not a church nor did they advertise themselves as a Christian bakery. They are free to limit what product they sell but not who they sell it to.So acting the clown is an argument now. Okay then. So why is there a law or laws protecting religious beliefs then? The RFRA for one, the First Amendment for two.
Let me try to explain this as simply as possible.
Religious beliefs and practices are protected, as long as they don't violate the law.
The law comes first.
But there are laws which protect religious belief, in that sense they along with themselves as laws make religious beliefs paramount, on the same level as the law itself.
Exactly.
No Christian is proposing child sacrifice. This is a matter of refusing to bake cakes for a ceremony that we are bound by our religion to fail to acknowledge.
They don't need to be a church to have religious freedom. Hey, go read the Burwell v. Hobby Lobby case if you need some pointers.
So acting the clown is an argument now. Okay then. So why is there a law or laws protecting religious beliefs then? The RFRA for one, the First Amendment for two.
Let me try to explain this as simply as possible.
Religious beliefs and practices are protected, as long as they don't violate the law.
The law comes first.
But there are laws which protect religious belief, in that sense they along with themselves as laws make religious beliefs paramount, on the same level as the law itself.
No, that's simply not true.
Again, if I joined a cult that performed human sacrifices, would that be a "protected religious belief"?
My, my, aren't we full of loaded questions? I will add that this is pretty much a red herring. Cakes and human sacrifice are far from being relevant to one another. There are some things that are taboo, killing people as part of a belief is one of them.
But, if Indians can do peyote in part due to their religious and ritual practices, then yes. If you partake in an illegal (or even barbarous) religious activity as part of a legitimate faith based belief system, it only stands to reason that you can, if you interpret the First Amendment in its strictest form. Please keep in mind that I don't advocate ritual human sacrifice.
The whole point of me using such an extreme example is to demonstrate the illogic in your argument.
It's against the law to murder. There's no religious exemption to that law.
It's again the law to discriminate based on sexual orientation. There is no religious exemption to that law either.
They need to be a church to discriminate.Again, they are not a church nor did they advertise themselves as a Christian bakery. They are free to limit what product they sell but not who they sell it to.Let me try to explain this as simply as possible.
Religious beliefs and practices are protected, as long as they don't violate the law.
The law comes first.
But there are laws which protect religious belief, in that sense they along with themselves as laws make religious beliefs paramount, on the same level as the law itself.
Exactly.
No Christian is proposing child sacrifice. This is a matter of refusing to bake cakes for a ceremony that we are bound by our religion to fail to acknowledge.
They don't need to be a church to have religious freedom. Hey, go read the Burwell v. Hobby Lobby case if you need some pointers.
They need to be a church to discriminate.Again, they are not a church nor did they advertise themselves as a Christian bakery. They are free to limit what product they sell but not who they sell it to.But there are laws which protect religious belief, in that sense they along with themselves as laws make religious beliefs paramount, on the same level as the law itself.
Exactly.
No Christian is proposing child sacrifice. This is a matter of refusing to bake cakes for a ceremony that we are bound by our religion to fail to acknowledge.
They don't need to be a church to have religious freedom. Hey, go read the Burwell v. Hobby Lobby case if you need some pointers.
Just what is that supposed to mean?
Let me try to explain this as simply as possible.
Religious beliefs and practices are protected, as long as they don't violate the law.
The law comes first.
But there are laws which protect religious belief, in that sense they along with themselves as laws make religious beliefs paramount, on the same level as the law itself.
No, that's simply not true.
Again, if I joined a cult that performed human sacrifices, would that be a "protected religious belief"?
My, my, aren't we full of loaded questions? I will add that this is pretty much a red herring. Cakes and human sacrifice are far from being relevant to one another. There are some things that are taboo, killing people as part of a belief is one of them.
But, if Indians can do peyote in part due to their religious and ritual practices, then yes. If you partake in an illegal (or even barbarous) religious activity as part of a legitimate faith based belief system, it only stands to reason that you can, if you interpret the First Amendment in its strictest form. Please keep in mind that I don't advocate ritual human sacrifice.
The whole point of me using such an extreme example is to demonstrate the illogic in your argument.
It's against the law to murder. There's no religious exemption to that law.
It's again the law to discriminate based on sexual orientation. There is no religious exemption to that law either.
It's a bad law.
And to refuse to bake a cake meant for an event you do not recognize on religious grounds is not discrimination.
But there are laws which protect religious belief, in that sense they along with themselves as laws make religious beliefs paramount, on the same level as the law itself.
No, that's simply not true.
Again, if I joined a cult that performed human sacrifices, would that be a "protected religious belief"?
My, my, aren't we full of loaded questions? I will add that this is pretty much a red herring. Cakes and human sacrifice are far from being relevant to one another. There are some things that are taboo, killing people as part of a belief is one of them.
But, if Indians can do peyote in part due to their religious and ritual practices, then yes. If you partake in an illegal (or even barbarous) religious activity as part of a legitimate faith based belief system, it only stands to reason that you can, if you interpret the First Amendment in its strictest form. Please keep in mind that I don't advocate ritual human sacrifice.
The whole point of me using such an extreme example is to demonstrate the illogic in your argument.
It's against the law to murder. There's no religious exemption to that law.
It's again the law to discriminate based on sexual orientation. There is no religious exemption to that law either.
It's a bad law.
And to refuse to bake a cake meant for an event you do not recognize on religious grounds is not discrimination.
Of course it is.
Let's try another example.
There are still "Christian" sects in this country that believe miscegenation is a sin against God.
Should a baker of that one of those religions be allowed to refuse to serve a mixed race couple?
